These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Back to the balancing future!

First post First post
Author
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#41 - 2012-11-06 15:41:26 UTC
I am not a fan of the the dual command bunuses either with the Mimmy line we could have fast hi ehp ships. Just give each race a 5% bonus and let the command ships have a dual bonus of 3%.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2012-11-06 15:43:52 UTC
does this mean I can finally take the eos out of storage I mothballed in 2007 when you so cruelly nerfed it?

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#43 - 2012-11-06 15:44:30 UTC
the dual command ship bonuses are basically the best thing you've ever suggested, ignore the people opposing them

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Grideris
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2012-11-06 15:44:49 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Want to make this clear to everyone, the stuff in this blog is not coming on the 4th with Retribution. This blog covers some of what we are going to be working on in the beginning of next year.

As for the gang link nerf discussion. It's extremely clear that the addition of the 5% bonused T3s combined with the T2 gang link modules created a perfect storm with gang boosts. These have become far too powerful and it has become almost impossible to compete without a booster alt. We're not switching command ship and T3 bonuses straight up because 5% links are overpowered, so everyone should probably start getting used to that idea.


While I can see what you're saying about the 5% bonus being over the top, I for one would still like to see some specialisation for particular races as far as the bonus amount goes. While for the Command ships it's not as bad (as each has a unique combination) the Tech 3 ships have two identical sets of bonuses. What are the chances of making one of the three bonuses 2.5% or even 3%, depending on the race of the ship? (So Gallente gets Info War, Amarr Armour, Caldari Siege and Minmatar Skirmish)

Also, I hope more Caldari ships moving over to damage bonus for hybrids doesn't start to step on the Gallente's "TONS OF DAMAGE" motif they have going on.

http://www.dust514.org - the unofficial forum for everything DUST 514 http://www.dust514base.com -** the** blog site with everything else DUST 514 you need

Logic Luke
Perkone
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-11-06 15:45:10 UTC
What about you start fixing shield capitals! like the ******* chimera.. COME ON CCP!
HydroSan
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-11-06 15:45:20 UTC
"Myrmidon: this vessel is mainly fine, but it couldn’t hurt giving it a bit more drone bandwidth and bay to make it more of an improvement when compared to the Vexor.

Dominix: still remains a popular ship. It is fairly good, except for the drone mechanics themselves, which are terribly outdated. While we are not certain when this can be tackled, it definitely has high priority on our to-do list.

Hyperion: the hull could be improved, but again most of the issues come from passive versus active tanking problems"

Basically Gallente sucks because the game mechanics suck. Can we just get fixes to active tanking and drones? Drone UI needs to be completely redone. This AI rat killing drones change needs to be axed. Active tanking needs to be changed or the hyperion bonus changed to passive resistance buff.
Tiregn
Anvil Capital Trading
#47 - 2012-11-06 15:47:12 UTC
I like that you are looking hard at getting rid of off-grid boosting.

If you do that, can you please make gang-links stay on like any other module, and not kick off any time you enter warp? Many times fleets on the field warp around trying to get in position on each other. Having to constantly remember to turn links on is a pain. Any thoughts on that one?
Natasha Liao
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2012-11-06 15:48:18 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Prophecy: expected to be changed to a drone boat. This is a role revamp that will radically modify its slot and fitting layout. It will most likely have less bandwidth but more drone bay than the Myrmidon.

Millions of Amarr voices screamed out in pain and were then silenced. Part of me died inside as I read that... Cry

On a serious note: If I wanted a Myrmidon, why wouldn't I just fly one to begin with?

You're using logic on an internet discussion forum. A rookie mistake, but one you'll soon learn to avoid. -Destiny Corrupted

Alara IonStorm
#49 - 2012-11-06 15:48:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Just an opinion on the baser hull stats.

I think you should + up BS Scan Res a tiny bit. Around 140-165 Standard max skill making them around Battlecruiser Level if they dump in a Sensor Booster but still very slow at locking Frigates and Cruisers.

I also think that lessening the Cap use of the 100MN MWD would be a big boon especially to Amarr who suck cap and Gallente who need mobility. Perhaps to around 4-5 minutes instead of 1.5 to 2.5 min with only the MWD running. Frigates / Dessies are stable, Cruisers get about 3-5min (think it should be brought up a tiny bit), Battlecruisers around 10min to Stable so 5ish would be a real good buff.

Basically make it so a Heavy Cap Boost isn't a major requirement just for having an MWD and make it so Battlecruisers / Cruisers don't have 10-15 Sec lock times but more 7-10.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#50 - 2012-11-06 15:48:45 UTC
HydroSan wrote:

Basically Gallente sucks because the game mechanics suck. Can we just get fixes to active tanking and drones? Drone UI needs to be completely redone.


Those are going to be a different dev blog

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#51 - 2012-11-06 15:49:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Bubanni
Looks good :)

For the pos situration, perhaps simply make the module unable to activate within 10km of a pos shield, 10km within a station and 10km within a stargate (kinda like smartbombs?)

I still think they should be able to boost from across a system, so they aren't forced to be on same grid, my arguement mainly comming from a tacklers point of view (someone who chases stuff from the other side of system, skrimish links are good to have to increase chance of catching someone)

well 10km might be a bit much for gates and stations... but that is mainly to prevent the "then I just sit on station and dock when someone tries to kill me, or jump the gate into high sec.".. siturations... while also on a pos the links will find themselves in a situration where they could get ganked before getting under the shields again

For people who use hard to probe t3 links, I personly think the each link should increase the signature by 10% per link, perhaps decrease strenght of Sensor strenght by 5-10% at the same time (this is a huge nerf to safespot links, as even a modest prober would be able to find them then while their links are active, also it makes sense that the links would increase the signature as it sends out "stuff" into space)


for tiericide plans :) it sounds pretty good, but I am also a big fan of interceptors, perhaps you should look at t2 frigs at the same time as command ships? and perhaps the t2 ewar frigs?

and for active reps bonused ships, why don't you include remote reps into that bonus, it would make ships like hyperion, myrmidon , cyclone... and so on, more practical in fleets (eventhough they have higher chance to be alphaed, they would potentially be able to tank more dps... 37.5% more hp recieved from reps at level 5

Also, I suggested before that you get someone to look into warp mechanics, so smaller ships accelerate faster to their max warping speed, (so a 14.5 AU/s ship reaches its top AU speed, just as fast as a 3 AU/s ship... lets say 5 sec just for fun, 5 sec to reach 14.5 au/s or 5 sec to reach 3 au/s, instead of the constant acceleration^2 we have now that is the exact same for all ships, deacceleration should be the same 5 sec to slow down in this example... I imagine it needs tweaking for short warps, is this the reason why it isn't just like this?)

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934

fukier
Brave Collective
#52 - 2012-11-06 15:49:05 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Your current plan for the Ferox is doomed. Short range shield brawlling is the key here.

Brutix should have a utiliy high and active armour tanking bonuses should diaf. Otherwise, please proceed.


i agree...

though personally for racial flavour i would prefer caldari adopt a ROF instead of a damage bonus...

as this would make caldari higher DPS and make Galente Higher bust damage.

also i would not get rid of the tanking bonus for the brutix just increase to 10% per level and make it also affect incomming external armour RR. i would also make the bonus affect the effectiveness of ERNM...

This would allow a brutix to either setup for small pvp (active tanking)

or passive fleet setup using ERNM... instead of armour plates which slow the ship down and make it harder to turn...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Mirei Jun
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2012-11-06 15:49:05 UTC
All sounds good. The devil is in the details.

Question:

When are T2 cruisers going to be adjusted? After December 4th quite a few hulls, HACs in particular will not bring enough options compared to their T1 counterparts.

The cost/efficiency ratio on T2 cruisers compared to T1s is going to fall pretty close to zero.
Intaki Kauyon
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2012-11-06 15:49:15 UTC
CCP: Would like a more clear representation of the BC/Destroyer skill changes.

Quote:
Reimbursement details:
•Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill.
• With the way nested skill requirements work in EVE, it also means that you will still be able to fly an Apocalypse even if you don’t have the Amarr Battlecruiser skill trained at 4 after the change. It won’t matter as long as you have the Amarr Battleship skill at the proper level.

With this in mind, it becomes quite obvious to focus on training the Destroyers and Battlecruisers skills before the change to get the maximum return effect. We highly recommend you start doing so now.


That's all fine and well. But while you are warning us on what to train now, please help us understand the change. You talk about BC skills translating based on the race you own via Cruiser or Frigates, but you don't say how that translates based on reverse. For instance:

If I have currently:

BC to V
Gall Cruiser to V
but Caldari Cruiser to IV

Do I get each one of the 4 BC new skills to V just becuase of current BC is V, or do I get:

Gall BC to V
but
Caldari BC to IV

?


I think one extra bullet in your explination would clear this. Basically, what I want to know is, if I like flying Nados now at V, do I need to slip in Minnie Cruiser to V before this change even though I have BC to V?
NoT KwarK
LP Incorporated
#55 - 2012-11-06 15:49:41 UTC
I am super excited for the CS changes, more viable ships is always awesome!
Antoine Jordan
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2012-11-06 15:50:04 UTC
So if I have Battlecruisers V and Amarr Cruiser III, after the patch I'll have Amarr Battlecruiser V, right? So that I can fly them to the same effectiveness I could before the patch.
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#57 - 2012-11-06 15:51:07 UTC
This sounds very promising! I especially love the mention of drone-mechanics-overhaul, hope it will be possible to fit into the next expansion. Similar feelings came up when I read about the "passive versus active tanking problems", so there might be a change on the horizon as well (I hope).

Truly EXCELLENT blog! Asking us early about changes: promised and delivered! I'm impressed!
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#58 - 2012-11-06 15:52:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Iris Bravemount
Very good news overall, but it sounds like you guys don't want to tiericide the larger hulls. The devblog doesn't mention giving all 'combat' Battleships and all 'attack' Battleships the same amount of slots and roughly the same fitting stats.

Please have a look at my plea against active tanking bonuses too:

Why active tank bonuses must go

PS: I LOVE the idea of giving all race's Command ships the ability to provide tanking boosts.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#59 - 2012-11-06 15:52:42 UTC
If you make crosstraining take longer, it will be more important to pick the "right" race when you create your character. There is very little relevant information made available to new players at that stage.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
Goonswarm Federation
#60 - 2012-11-06 15:52:42 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Want to make this clear to everyone, the stuff in this blog is not coming on the 4th with Retribution. This blog covers some of what we are going to be working on in the beginning of next year.

As for the gang link nerf discussion. It's extremely clear that the addition of the 5% bonused T3s combined with the T2 gang link modules created a perfect storm with gang boosts. These have become far too powerful and it has become almost impossible to compete without a booster alt. We're not switching command ship and T3 bonuses straight up because 5% links are overpowered, so everyone should probably start getting used to that idea.



even at 3 and 2% gang link alts are still required to compete.

if your on grid in the fight risking your ship you should be getting 5% boost(same as it is today, just on grid), you want to hide in a pos or safe yeh you shouldnt get 5%.

OMG when can i get a pic here